What I hear, to me is a fact. To others, my testimony about what I hear is just a collection of words.
That's pure guess on your part, since you don't know what audio gear I use.
The actual facts are the other way around.
I'm under no obligation to prove anything to any one.
The debate between subjectivists and objectivists is pointless, since so far neither group managed to convince the other one by words.
This is nothing else than a speculation on your part.
You assume to know when I'm comfortable and when I'm not, while you have no actual knowledge about it.
It may have no value to some, yet it may have a value to some others.
Sometimes, when a person shares ones' experience, the mere sharing may have certain value to some people.
Good for you. I'm not as lucky as you are, since I don't have a measuring gear that will indicate a correlation between measurements and sound quality. I only have a couple of excellent scopes and HP distortion analyzer.
What are those tests, if I may ask?
Such a statement, as the above, without giving any specifics and details is meaningless.
Do you mean more sensitive THD tests, or tests other than THD?
How much more sensitive? What other tests?
To your view and to your eperience, will an amplifier having a THD of 0.001% will always and necessarily sound better than an amplifier having a THD of 0.5%?
I also have some experience in servicing electronics gear and audio gear. To be specific, 45 years of experience, including about a decade for the Israeli Broadcasting Service (similar to the BBC, on a local scale).
Yet, servicing audio gear and bringing it up to the manufacturer's specs on one hand and choosing audio gear for its' sound quality on the other hand, are two different things. To my experience, they aren't correlated at all.
Anyhow, I'd be very happy if you'd share your findings about what measurements have a direct correlation with audible sound quality. So far you made some general statements, without supporting your statements with any details.
I know that this is your viewpoint. It may be only your viewpoint, since you didn't support it with any details.
My own experience is different. I don't have a measuring gear that would predict the sound quality of audio gear out of measurements alone.
This is so to your viewpoint, based on your assumptions. You only assume about my attempt at measurements, since you never bothered to ask me about it. This is an example of an attitude which is as far from scientific approach as it can be.
I'd be very happy should I'd be able to predict the sound quality by measurements only. I did try, however so far I was unsuccessful with the measuring gear I have. There are no measurement I know of that will predict the sound quality of a power cord, or a power splitting box. THD alone is almost meaningless in determining the sound quality of amps and other audio gear, unless the THD is very high, say over 1%.
This was addressed above.
This is yet another speculation on your part.
Have you ever asked me what tools I use?
Please share with us: what tools assist one's auditory training?
It is you who turns this discussion into a personal one.
As long as you don't specify what information you refer to, what you consider as "people with more information" may be only people with a belief system that opposes some findings. There is no way of knowing whether you are correct here, or not, as long as you come out with a general statement like this, without any details and specifics.
Who are those people with more information?
What information are you referring to?
I choose gear to my sound system according to the way it sounds, not according to any belief.
Thank you.
I never stated such a thing.
To the objectivists, subjectivism clouds the discussion.
A true discussion entails willingness to consider facts and observations which may be in contradiction to one's prior attitude and beliefs.
As long as a direct correlation between measurements and sound quality isn't established, objectivism is nothing other than a stand, a belief.
So far you only stated your view point, that there is a correlation between measurements and sound quality. You didn't specify what measurements have a direct correlation to the sound quality. Moreover, you only stated that there is such correlation, you didn't bring any proof to such a correlation.
You are correct.
Concerning power cords, there is another point.
Some power cords have an outer screen shield, connected at one point to the ground, while other cords don't have such a shield. The shield may have an impact, which has nothing to do with whether the cord id faulty, or not.
Chris, surprisingly the single photon stuff is true- sort of. It generally takes a higher flux (if memory serves, something like 50-60 photons for 100 milliseconds) to register in the brain that a flash has happened, but under some circumstances, single photons can be perceived. And lab measurements of retinal response show that, if the single photon hits a receptor, the retina does send out an impulse. The brain usually but not always demands more before it says, "OK, there was a flash."
Sorry, OT, but I find stuff like this fascinating. 😀
Sorry, OT, but I find stuff like this fascinating. 😀
As a rule, I ignore advice from the UK regarding dentistry, auto mechanics, and cooking. 😀😀😀
Just to avoid some possible red herrings, can I remind people that the Seebeck effect does not happen at the junction of a thermocouple but in the wires leading up to the junction? The junction is simply part of the circuit. Nothing special happens there, it is just the place where the conductors change from one metal to another so all you need is a good low resistance joint by any reasonable means (clamping, soldering, welding). I realise that the thermocouple experts know this, but it seems not to be widely known by others.
Food always tastes better with real silverware! Real China improves things also.
Way back when we actually sold sound systems to restaurants we attended the local restaurant trade show. Very informative, learned about lots of prepared food to avoid.
One item being shown was institutional plastic dining ware. A thick rubbery plastic that was coated to make it more scratch resistant, thick enough to never break and rated for dishwashers. The choice of colors ranged from barf brown to panic purple.
As the show closed the exhibitor was going to throw out their samples as they were so cheap, they were not worth taking back on the return trip. So I acquired several sets.
Even my dog would not eat food off of one of the plates! The feel of the mugs was to use the only word that even comes close to fitting.. was "Icky." The thick light weight pieces felt bad looked bad and just reinforced the belief that one would never want to have to be anywhere that served food with these items.
We did use the bowls and cups for paint and other shop uses!
As to does stainless ware make a difference, there also were cheaply stamped pieces at the shows that had burrs on the edges that would leave parts of your mouth bleeding!
Then there was the usually nice restaurant I went to last week, ordered the poached eggs over braised lamb. Got hard boiled (but poach style) rubbery eggs over boiled mutton. Took two tastes as I couldn't believe what was served!
Quite a few other bibliographic booboos, so they're consistent with their, ahhh, science.
Unlike Ken, I actually knew Stan Pons quite well- we were rivals and collaborators in his actual area of competence (infrared spectroelectrochemistry).
http://www.nkkswitches.com/pdf/supplement_cat.pdf Page 5 mention issues with very low level switches failing and the types required to continue working.
There's talk about contact arcing, etc. I don't see the applicability here. Failure is contact destruction as far as I can tell.
And BTW you are still confusing me. You showed scope plots of sine waves with as you now claim nV discontinuities at zero, while even in a 1Hz bw 100 Ohms has ~10nV p-p of noise yet your plots are clean.
Last edited:
Small arcs do not destroy switches, they keep them clean to keep working.
What I am getting is an increase in noise at low signal levels. That does not happen at higher levels.
One possible explanation is that if a non-conductive (to less than 12 volts 100ua) film forms in a few days does a lesser one form faster. Can this lesser one be cleared with smaller voltages and currents. If the noise voltage by itself were capable of clearing this then the higher voltage barrier would not form.
I think there is a very mundane explanation for all of this.
Check your gear out. If you still think it's ok, try to get the experiment repeated on a different set of gear.
I am sure if the phenomena you say you can observe really existed, it would already have been discovered (no offense). Besides, it sounds like it would be a pain in the butt to deal with.
Good luck in our quest!
Check your gear out. If you still think it's ok, try to get the experiment repeated on a different set of gear.
I am sure if the phenomena you say you can observe really existed, it would already have been discovered (no offense). Besides, it sounds like it would be a pain in the butt to deal with.
Good luck in our quest!
Contact failure to conduct very low level signals is well known to those who have worked with and explored contact phenomena.
This is not what I gather from the brochure linked by Simon.
It just says that if you use gold on silver plated switches, you can use them for low level switching. Until you use them for higher power switching, because then the gold burns of through to arching. Subsequently, it can be used for higher power switching because the arching will keep the contacts clean.
Do you know any reference in literature or manufacturers application notes on the failure to conduct very low level signals?
ATE (automatic test equipment) has been dealing with this problem for years. Without trauma.
http://www.digikey.com/Web Export/S...witchingLowMicrovoltsSignals.pdf?redirected=1
- Status
- Not open for further replies.